June 19 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau is close to revealing the details of its
marquee project: reducing the reams of paperwork that borrowers
must hack through when getting a mortgage.

The project, designed to benefit consumers and lenders,
began more than year ago to consolidate and simplify forms that
federal law requires that lenders provide to borrowers. In May
2011 the agency started releasing model disclosure forms that it
said were easier to read and understand.

In previewing its proposal, which must be released by July
21, the bureau has also said that over the last few months it is
considering modifying core mortgage disclosure requirements,
such as how the annual percentage rate is calculated. The plan
is drawing fire from banks and consumer advocates alike.

“Given the amount of effort here, there’s not a lot of
bang for the buck in only deciding whether you do 10-point or
12-point font,” Mark Calabria, director of financial regulation
studies at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said in an
interview.

The proposal will be the first in a series of rulemakings
that will reshape mortgage lending for giants including Wells
Fargo & Co. and Bank of America Corp. Subsequent rules will
outline the responsibilities of lenders in underwriting,
securitization and servicing. The bureau’s deputy director, Raj
Date, is scheduled to testify tomorrow at a House Financial
Services Committee hearing about the forms.

Warren’s Model

Elizabeth Warren, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate and
Harvard University professor who set up the consumer bureau,
kicked off the effort in May 2011 by releasing a model form that
would allow consumers to shop around for mortgages. The bureau
subsequently introduced a model form for finalizing a mortgage -
- known as closing, or settlement -- and tested it with focus
groups of consumers.

The project stems from a mandate in the Dodd-Frank Act of
2010 to break a decades-old stalemate in federal mortgage
policy.

The Truth in Lending Act, administered by the Federal
Reserve, and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, overseen
by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, both
required separate forms for getting a mortgage estimate and for
closing. Repeated efforts to harmonize the two forms failed,
Calabria said, so Congress in Dodd-Frank charged the new
consumer agency, now the steward of both laws, with the task.

Against the backdrop of other coming rules, the Consumer
Bankers Association has urged the consumer bureau to limit the
July proposal to the new forms and regulations to support them.

‘Organized Approach’

“Not only would this be a more organized approach for the
industry that must comply with all of these massive changes, but
we believe consumers will be less confused,” Jeffrey Bloch, the
group’s associate general counsel, wrote in an April 16 letter.

The consumer bureau announced in a Feb. 21 advisory posted
on its website that it is considering major changes to the use
of the annual percentage rate, the key metric laid down in the
Truth in Lending Act for calculating the cost of a mortgage.

The APR takes the interest rate, incorporates other fees
associated with a mortgage, and is designed to give the consumer
a single metric to assess the cost of a loan. However, the Truth
in Lending law excludes some potentially costly fees from the
APR calculation, such as charges for title searches and
insurance.

The consumer bureau may propose incorporating other fees,
including title costs, into the APR calculation, it said in the
Feb. 21 advisory. Bureau spokesman Moira Vahey declined to
comment on the changes.

Calabria, a former official at the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, said the change would be consumer-friendly.

Title ‘Cartel’

“If title insurance is part of the calculation, then
lenders can negotiate volume discounts and push down the price
that title insurers can charge,” Calabria said. “Right now,
the rules let the title insurers maintain a cartel.”

A title insurance industry association said such a so-called all-in APR may lead to confusion for borrowers.

“We are also concerned that an all-in APR will hurt
consumers’ incentives to shop for title insurance and mislead
consumers about their costs in states where, by custom, the
seller always pays the title fees, where the charges are split
evenly between the buyer and seller and where the borrow pays
the title charges,” Michelle Korsmo, chief executive officer of
the American Land Title Association in Washington, said in a
statement. “In addition, an all-in APR will also significantly
reduce the availability of credit by pushing low-income
borrowers into what are considered high-cost loans, which will
raise the cost of credit.”

Consumer advocates have criticized the bureau’s draft
mortgage forms, which they uses a graphic that that de-emphasizes the APR calculation in favor of the interest rate.
That creates room for lenders to jack up fees that raise the
total cost of a loan, said Andrew Pizor, an attorney with the
National Consumer Law Center.

“They are improving the form on one hand and flushing it
down the toilet by giving short shrift to the APR,” Pizor said
in an interview.